Integrating blue: How do we make nationally determined contributions work for both blue carbon and local coastal communities?

Blue Carbon Ecosystems (BCEs) help mitigate and adapt to climate change but their integration into policy, such as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), remains underdeveloped. Most BCE conservation requires community engagement, hence community-scale projects must be nested within the implementation of NDCs without compromising livelihoods or social justice. Thirty-three experts, drawn from academia, project development and policy, each developed ten key questions for consideration on how to achieve this. These questions were distilled into ten themes, ranked in order of importance, giving three broad categories of people, policy & finance, and science & technology. Critical considerations for success include the need for genuine participation by communities, inclusive project governance, integration of local work into national policies and practices, sustaining livelihoods and income (for example through the voluntary carbon market and/or national Payment for Ecosystem Services and other types of financial compensation schemes) and simplification of carbon accounting and verification methodologies to lower barriers to entry. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13280-022-01723-1.


Theme 1: Environmental and Social Sustainability
How do we ensure that carbon projects support long-term changes to the use of land and natural resources that will be maintained after the period when carbon finance is available?
How will projects ensure regenerative ecology, risk management and resilience at the local level?
How do we communicate the need for systemic political change, promoting blue carbon along with other sensible options?
How can governments and communities optimise the social and environmental benefits of conserving blue carbon ecosystems?
What mechanisms support national policy and institutional programs, in order to ensure the permanence of blue carbon sinks at the community level?
Are there conditions that can be adhered to so that commitments made are achieved even when faced with political changes within local governments?
How do we address local drivers of deforestation and degradation without undermining the livelihoods of local communities?
How will community involvement be ensured and allow the sustainability of local livelihoods?
What happens for Nature-based Solutions, including blue carbon, if international agreements such as the Paris Agreement fall apart?
What possibilities exist for developing large-scale transboundary blue carbon initiatives, particularly where interconnected mangrove-seagrass ecosystems cross administrative and jurisdictional boundaries? And, in these instances, how would NDCs be equitably determined between countries?
For SIDS and vulnerable communities, how can we adapt and mitigate against climate change effects such as SLR and ensure the longevity of projects for this?

Theme 2. Participation and Collaboration
What is the level of participation ( for example during developing policy instruments and in the management of natural resources) for local communities when it comes to NDC policy implementation and development?
What are the most efficient and effective existing fora at local, district/county, national, regional level to discuss the role, representation, inclusion and contribution of communitybased carbon projects in national and international NDC policies?
How will small and medium enterprises benefit in terms of human resource development when blue carbon is incorporated into NDCs?
What will be the participatory governance and institutionality required in our countries to ensure proper dialogues, co-planning and co-execution of community blue carbon projects?
How can governments, NGOs and community groups collaborate (nationally and internationally) to share resources, experience and skills required to implement blue carbon management at a local scale?
How do we promote greater participation of local communities in blue carbon projects (a mitigation issue) when their most pressing needs are related to adaptation, immediate livelihood needs, infrastructure, e.t.c?
How to make blue carbon conservation more financially and socially attractive than other alternative land uses and conservation approaches?
How do we ensure stakeholder mapping at the national level to create inclusive communication channels between authorities and the civil society, as well as encourage regional co-operation, for successful NDC implementation?
What would be the key enablers that could facilitate or encourage small landholders' participation in NDCs? How can heterogeneity in communities within nations be incorporated into national strategies that meaningfully engage communities?
How can the buy-in at community level be obtained/assured and sustained?
Theme 3: Governance of local projects How can credit and accountability for management successes and failures be distributed fairly in co-management between governments and community groups?
How can governments ensure that NDC targets are locally appropriate and acceptable among communities?
Can/how can capacity building among community groups/NGOs facilitate cost-effective implementation of NDCs?
How can communities that have little access to information or know-how gain access to those organisations (i.e. GEF, World Bank, WRI, etc) that are funding activities which are directly or indirectly related to NDCs?
From a double-counting and marketing perspective are governments introducing safeguards to prevent impacting small landholders already engaged on emission reductions (i.e. Plan Vivo projects)?
To what extent are social justice concerns (e.g. gender and social equity) currently being built into the development of blue carbon initiatives, in relation to both the financial and ecological benefit flows received by communities, and how can these concerns be more central to the development of those initiatives?
Inclusion of Blue carbon into NDCs will limit extractive activities with an aim of increasing climate change mitigation efforts. How will the communities whose culture is tied to the blue carbon ecosystems, be supported so as to maintain their Business As Usual (BAU)?
What steps can be taken, drawing on past experiences, to ensure local, national and regional policy makers appreciate and value the role and contribution of communities and their indigenous knowledge in designing policy to encourage and enable (blue) carbon offsetting projects for the benefit of people and nature?
How can governments ensure that the vast majority of the profit/benefit from a BC project stays in-country and in the community?
Will the government provide support and funding to achieve the enabling conditions so the community will be in position to start implementing activities and deliver NDC targets?
How can we cost-effectively quantify the benefits of community-level carbon projects?
How can we distribute benefits from carbon projects within communities in a manner that benefits the most vulnerable and marginalised members of the community and avoids elite capture?
Where are the success stories that we can draw and disseminate lessons learned from and scale up/down from local to national initiatives?
How can we minimise unintended or perverse incentives associated with blue carbon? (e.g. blue carbon credits = more money in a community = investment in fishing gear = overfishing) How can we make small projects count? (Remote sensing, inventories?) What mechanisms can be put in place to manage community expectations?

Theme 4: Land rights and tenure
How can land tenure rights be given to communities for sustainable management of resources but with contributions towards adaptation/mitigation going to the state?
What tenure and land rights do we need to ensure local communities have ownership of blue carbon ecosystems?
Does the area and type of BCE have legal recognition by the national government as being community owned or managed?
Where are NDC targets from community-managed areas located in community/communally/privately-owned land or in state-owned land managed by community and who are the proponents of the targets?
Is there a risk that countries' NDC actions and commitments might disadvantage entire communities? For example, where reduction of deforestation and forest degradation is a national goal, there is a possibility that regulations might prevent community access and use of forest products.
How do we determine/clarify/claim land ownership so that carbon credits can be given directly to local coastal communities?

Theme 5: Communication and dissemination
How should we communicate the importance of blue carbon and Nature-based Solutions?
How do we scale up local efforts and make it easier for communities to conserve and enhance blue carbon?
Where can I learn about my country's NDC consultation process and can I directly provide input?
Where can I learn what sinks and sources my country includes in their national GHG inventory?
How do we ensure accurate awareness raising and education about these systems are available to communities to ensure conservation?
How can projects create awareness of the importance of carbon (in particular blue carbon)?
What are the governance processes for the project that involve multi stakeholders (community, business, NGOs, government ministries, etc.) and how will the project outcomes be captured and disseminated among stakeholders?
What lessons and good practice can be learnt and incorporated from previous relevant experiences (e.g. convention on biological diversity (CBD)) on access and benefit sharing ?
Is there political awareness of the adaptation and mitigation potential of the national Blue Carbon Ecosystems (BCE)?
Are there enough step-by-step and easy to follow community manuals and guidelines in establishing blue carbon projects? (including restoration manuals and other management toolkits). If so, what hinders communities from adopting these manuals and establishing projects?
Are there systems in place to facilitate knowledge sharing, collaboration and cooperation to encourage broader transboundary projects that can be useful?
If blue carbon projects are transboundary, how do they contribute to each country's NDC? Are there community-driven initiatives that can be mainstreamed into NDC strategies?

Theme 6: Policy interactions
Can we establish RAMSAR-like protection systems internationally to protect important and vulnerable blue carbon assets?
To what extent can blue carbon / biosequestration projects help meet NDCs for each nation?
How can we integrate climate (UNFCCC) and biodiversity (CBD) goals through blue carbon project design and implementation?
How do we link the monitoring of blue carbon projects' mitigation targets transparently into larger forest cover monitoring, REDD+ and/or MRV systems while being consistent with national GHG reporting efforts?
How can BCE contribute to NDCs if relevant jurisdictions, governance, responsibilities and objectives overlap, conflict or are unclear?
How can we avoid moral hazard (i.e. using offsetting instead of reducing emissions) if blue carbon is part of international offsetting?
How are blue carbon sinks and capture going to be integrated into the National Emissions Inventory and how would emission factors be measured and standardised country-wide?